Conflict between limits on Declarations and endorsement
In Ferguson v. Corgis Insurance Co., the issue was the limits of a CGL policy. The policy declarations showed a $2 million limit, but there was a endorsement which tied the limits to the limits in the Idaho Governmental Tort Claim Act. Unfortunately for Corgis, however, the Idaho GTCA stated required minimum limits for insurance policies, not maximum limits. Thus, the Ninth Circuit found the policy was not ambiguous and the $2 million limit applied. It therefore reversed summary judgment in favor of Corgis.
This is an interesting case – not necessarily for the holding, but because under undisputed facts, two courts reached opposite conclusions and still found the policy unambiguous.
